Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Musei Vaticani (football club)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Fenix down (talk) 04:40, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Musei Vaticani (football club)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Can't find any evidence of notability. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:21, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:21, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:11, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:04, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Vatican City Championship; no independent notability but possible search term. Very low level league here, made up of museum employees. Giant Snowman 20:53, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep-even if there is a lack of sources in English, there is Italian coverage. Also the article meets notability requirements for football clubs which state “Teams that have played in the national cup (or the national level of the league structure in countries where no cup exists) generally meet WP:GNG criteria. Teams that are not eligible for national cups must be shown to meet broader WP:N criteria.” This club plays in the country’s top tier cup and league annually.--Gri3720 (talk) 23:59, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, passes GNG.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:24, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No clear consensus, but keep votes don't show GNG. Extending to allow time for presentation of sources claimed to exist. Editors are also reminded the WP:FOOTYN, which appears to be alluded to here, is not a guideline but an essay based on local consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fenix down (talk) 09:31, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment-There was not "more thorough discussion" because the majority of voters voted to keep and gave their reason why but no one who voted "delete" or "merge" responded to further the discussion. I feel that this re-nomination for deletion may be fueled by religious bias. Fenix down you have created articles for DOZENS of clubs that do not have any references other than the RSSSF. The other article you nominated for deletion FC Guardia closed as keep. There's no reason this one shouldn't be the same. The club plays in the top tier cup/league in a sovereign nation which GENERALLY qualifies them for GNG. Perhaps you are not proficient in Italian. Example sources are below. --Gri3720 (talk) 23:49, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gri3720: you can't vote "keep" twice. Please change your post to "Comment" instead of "keep". REDMAN 2019 (talk) 11:48, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @REDMAN 2019:

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:33, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Meets GNG based on Italian sources. It should also be noted that WP:FOOTY has been depreciated and now are guidelines, not policy. BilledMammal (talk) 06:23, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Not sure why the reslists. It's clearly a keep from the comments and references provided, to the point there's little point commenting. Perhaps User:GiantSnowman can revisit his redirect to start the snow. Nfitz (talk) 22:42, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes GNG per available coverage in news websites. DmitriRomanovJr (talk) 05:17, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes GNG. Finch14 (talk) 06:19, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.